- This topic has 42 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
All the classic winners trained in Ireland.The best sprinters came from Australia.The middle distance from Australia.The classic distance from Germany.The cup horses from Ireland.But for Frankel there would be little to shout home about racing and trained in England.Has the failuire of Godolphin anything to do with this? Have they been keeping English racing a float for the longest time?Seems like even they were rescued by Jim Bolger.The above is simply an observation and not exnophobic The best horses come here to race. England is the home of international racing.That alone is a worthwhile consideration.
Eight of the world’s current top 20 racehorses are trained in the UK, Andy.
Has the Republic been annexed? Uncivil wars have been waged over similar disputes. On the most recent WTR Frankel, Monterosso, Cityscape and Sea Moon were the only ones I could see. Nathaniel and possibly Farhh make it into the top 20 next time.
Timeform, EF.
It is rather silly to regard some of those rating as current, Strong Suit and Excelebration in particular, as well as the bias given by a UK-based business selling their product to primarily a UK based market.
Is it any wonder blokes with the knowledge of Simon Rowlands and his ilk don’t post on here any more?
Have you a "yawn" emoticon, corm?
Had you not put "current" in your post and said Timeform’s latest figures then I would not have had reason to question you. There are also horses in that list who have been retired, again making your use of "current" redundant.
I was referring to horses who have won the major races for 3yos and up in GB this current season.
Good question.Does the question beg the question? Can anyone help this gentleman? Does it really matter? Does anyone care? Is the concern expressed in the question relevant? Exactly.Has horse racing become the penalty shootout for England?
John Gosden seems to be having a reasonably good year (understatement !) , and he is based in England.
Frankel is the best horse in the world, by a mile , and he is based in England.
The Stoute yard seems again to have a lack of top notch animals, as does Cumani (sadly seems to be a stable in decline).
Godolphin (for me) always seem to underachieve.
Otherwise nice to see Sir Henry (despite his health) definitely rising back to the absolute top.
Best trainer there is , in my view.It is rather silly to regard some of those rating as current, Strong Suit and Excelebration in particular, as well as the bias given by a UK-based business selling their product to primarily a UK based market.
Showing your ignorance of the form book again Eclipse.
You really haven’t got a clue when it comes to ratings. All you can do is make false accusations.Stick to breeding, you know something about that.
Best Timeform Racehorse before Frankel came along, Sea Bird.
French
.
Not far behind him, Ribot,
Italian
, who’s rated better than the best British mile-and-a-half horses Mill Reef, Shergar, Dancing Brave and Harbinger.
Equal best females, Allez France,
French
. Black Caviar,
Australian
. Habibti, English. Have I missed anyone out?
If Timeform are biased towards British horses, they are NOT doing a very good job about it.
Value Is EverythingHad you not put "current" in your post and said Timeform’s latest figures then I would not have had reason to question you. There are also horses in that list who have been retired, again making your use of "current" redundant.
What’s wrong with using "Current" for the "current" season/year EF?
You are so xxxxxxx pedantic! As Cav says, it is no wonder some good members don’t post on here anymore. Although he himself may have been at least partly responsible for seeing off Lydia Hislop.It is far too early to be knocking Excelebration down. On the form book, Lockinge performance isn’t far behind last year’s QEII.
Strong Suit has been injured since last year, with both ground and trip question marks about the July Cup run. Doubt whether he’ll have the rating by season’s end, but another run or two should help in establishing his rating this term. Write ups, which go alongside any rating gives an idea of how likely they believe a horse is of running to its rating. A master rating is after all for a horse given optimum conditions.
Value Is Everythingwhere have all the racehorses gone?
That’s what I thought when I looked at the RP website this morning – banging on about the new football season? – it’s supposed to be about horse racing!!
As much as every person with a vague interest in football is looking forward to this season’s Arsenal campaign, which could possibly be Frankel-esque, RP should be about horses, not football.
Had you not put "current" in your post and said Timeform’s latest figures then I would not have had reason to question you. There are also horses in that list who have been retired, again making your use of "current" redundant.
What’s wrong with using "Current" for the "current" season/year EF?
You are so xxxxxxx pedantic! As Cav says, it is no wonder some good members don’t post on here anymore. Although he himself may have been at least partly responsible for seeing off Lydia Hislop.It is far too early to be knocking Excelebration down. On the form book, Lockinge performance isn’t far behind last year’s QEII.
Strong Suit has been injured since last year, with both ground and trip question marks about the July Cup run. Doubt whether he’ll have the rating by season’s end, but another run or two should help in establishing his rating this term. Write ups, which go alongside any rating gives an idea of how likely they believe a horse is of running to its rating. A master rating is after all for a horse given optimum conditions.
It is a question of just how reliable one thinks any set of ratings are as a guide. While Frankel is the best horse in training it is fair that he is the highest rated. When looking through the rest of that list I would seriously question the positions of several of the horses in relation to others. Excelebration and Strong Suit, even on their very best form are just not that good. Farhh has not achieved anything like as much as the horses to whom he is rated equal. The common factor in these is that the ratings are for English-trained horse viz Excelebration’s rating is from last year when trained in England.
Andy’s original post quite clearly stated current, the list offered up by a disciple without justification merely falls under the umbrella of lies, damned lies and statistics.
It is a question of just how reliable one thinks any set of ratings are as a guide. While Frankel is the best horse in training it is fair that he is the highest rated. When looking through the rest of that list I would seriously question the positions of several of the horses in relation to others. Excelebration and Strong Suit, even on their very best form are just not that good.
Farhh has not achieved anything like as much as the horses to whom he is rated equal.
The
common factor
in these is that the ratings are for English-trained horse viz Excelebration’s rating is from last year when trained in England.
Andy’s original post quite clearly stated current, the list offered up by a disciple without justification merely falls under the umbrella of lies, damned lies and statistics.
And that demonstrates why you have not got a clue about ratings EF. Horses don’t have to win races to (how you say) "achieve" a good rating. Farhh was beaten just half a length in the Eclipse by Nathaniel. Therefore he deserves a rating of almost as good as Nathaniel. You seem to think a rating should go up if a horse wins more/a Group 1/’s, it doesn’t. Form is how one horse ran against the next. It does not matter that Farhh didn’t win the Eclipse, it is his position compared to Nathaniel, Twice Over and co that matters. It also does not matter he was so far behind his current rating in the Sussex… If Timeform believe him capable of returning to form, then they should keep the 130 rating.
And when do you want a horse’s rating to be changed to this year’s rating? After its first run of the season? Second? When?
Just because a horse hasn’t run to a rating that year does not mean the rating should be changed, can’t have horses being rated lower than Timeform believe him/her capable of. Otherwise it would NOT give punters a fair reading of a horse’s capabilities. Big Buck’s best ratings were achieved in 2009, should he be marked down if they believe him still capable of such a rating (when or if needed)?The "common factor" in your posts EF is you have not got a clue how Timeform ratings are established. Both form and time comparisson means Farhh has to be rated that highly. Not "lies, damned lies and statistics" at all.
If Timeform are "biased" EF, then how do you explain all those top ratings given to other Nationalities in my previous post?
Value Is EverythingFarhh only deserves a rating close to Nathaniel’s highest rating if you think he ran up to his best when he won the Eclipse. If you do not believe Nathaniel had to run to his best to win the Eclipse or that he did not produce his best that day then logically a rating accorded to Farhh for his proximity to Nathaniel should be based on Nathaniel’s run in the Eclipse, not his best ever rating.
If Timeform’s ratings as given in the table, were to include some facts like distance, going and date then one might be able to evaluate their relevance. The table as a standalone piece of information is a masterpiece of vagueness.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.